On Warrengate: Why Rick Warren's Selection is not a Setback for Gay Rights

Barack Obama has been taking a lot of criticism for his selection of the Rev. Rick Warren to give the invocation at his inauguration. While I strongly support gay marriage, and gay rights in general, I do not see this as a setback. In fact, this may ultimately allow Obama to pursue a more strongly pro-gay agenda.

Obama will be the most pro-gay president in our history. This is not saying much; Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, and Bush was most certainly not friendly to the gay community. While words are not enough, Obama has shown a willingness to talk about this issue, which many Democrats consider toxic. His mention of "gay friends in the red states" in his 2004 convention speech, and similar turns of phrase in future speeches, was rather unusual for a politician with national ambitions, and he has been assertive in his support of civil unions.

What the selection of Rick Warren does is give Obama some more political capital on gay rights issues. In essence, by appearing to be anti-gay, Obama is buying himself the political capital to be pro-gay. It will be difficult for Obama to pursue pro-gay initiatives if the country sees him as a radical liberal on these issues. After all, while much of the country supports civil unions, most of it opposes gay marriage, and social conservatives frequently play a major role in elections. By reaching out to the social conservatives, Obama will seem less liberal even as he pursues the same policies. In politics, perception is often as important reality.

During the presidential campaign, Obama was often targeted for his associations with people such as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers. The same people who were willing to look beyond this — rightly, in my view — should also look beyond the selection of Rick Warren and see Obama for what he truly stands for.